Taperssection.com
Gear / Technical Help => Recording Gear => Topic started by: John R on March 04, 2004, 08:48:24 AM
-
so i finally got a new computer and loaded notmad onto it. (getting the old audigy soundcard loaded onto the new box is another story...) did my first transfer last night and noticed that my bitrates are different for different sets of the same show. is there some step i'm missing while getting this thing into record mode?
jr
-
so i finally got a new computer and loaded notmad onto it. (getting the old audigy soundcard loaded onto the new box is another story...) did my first transfer last night and noticed that my bitrates are different for different sets of the same show. is there some step i'm missing while getting this thing into record mode?
jr
did ya try and record in 48k or 44.1k???
-
44
-
so the notmad ISNT what came w/ the jb3 then, right???i havent had ANY problems w/ the oroginal cd that came w/ the jb3 :)
-
i don't think it's a software issue, unless it's the transfer (jb3>computer)bitrate. it appears to be the recorded bitrate. anyone? buelher?
bean, check out redchair http://www.redchairsoftware.com/notmad/
for notmad.
jr
-
I'm confused as to what's actually happening here. I *think* what I'm hearing is:
You had two 16-bit/44.1kHz recordings on the JB3.
You transferred both to PC using Notmad Explorer.
Once on your PC - and with no additional editing by you - the two recordings appear to have...different bit-depths, different sample rates, ?? This is where I'm confused.
-
The JB3 picks up what bitrate you feed it automatically.
*edit*
Assuming you have a pre/ad that gives you the option.
-
I'm confused as to what's actually happening here. I *think* what I'm hearing is:
You had two 16-bit/44.1kHz recordings on the JB3.
You transferred both to PC using Notmad Explorer.
Once on your PC - and with no additional editing by you - the two recordings appear to have...different bit-depths, different sample rates, ?? This is where I'm confused.
before the transfer, i'm looking at moe, mule, and dread clampitt sets on the jb3 using notmad. one of the columns on the right is the bitrate column. within the same show, the bitrate was different for each set( 1,2,e). no setings on the v3 changed during the show.
they're all transferred now, so the next time i'll have to really recreate the environment will be springfest on the 25th, and boy will i have a lot of music. i'll probably end up dumping the shows every night onto the lappy, or possibly taking my desktop over there for the firewire transferability.
any thoughts?
jr
-
A couple thoughts:
1) I'm not familiar with Notmad, but perhaps it is automatically converting to mp3 when it is used to transfer your recordings from your JB3 to your pc.
2) You didn't set the JB3 properly when you made the recordings. Each time you use the JB3 to record, you need to tell it you want to record a .wav file. It does not automatically default to the last setting you used it at (wav, persumably), but instead defaults to converting the incoming digital stream (from the V3 in this case) to mp3 at some particular bitrate, I forget which.
-Todd
-
before the transfer, i'm looking at moe, mule, and dread clampitt sets on the jb3 using notmad. one of the columns on the right is the bitrate column. within the same show, the bitrate was different for each set( 1,2,e). no setings on the v3 changed during the show.
Hey JR - just had a chance to check this out here at home. I think this is just a bug in Notmad. When you transferred, were all the files still 16-bit, 44.1k/48k or whatever sample rate at which you recorded?
Looking at my JB3 in Notmad Explorer right now, 9 recordings and Notmad lists every single one as a different bitrate (-288, -33, 1507, 1528, 4, 425, -434, -104, 1415), but when I transfer they're all 16-bit/44.1kHz as they should be. Bug city, sounds like, I wouldn't sweat it.
-
nice find brian
guyz, as soon as i get some $$, ill buy the notmad
-
BTW I was thinking sample rate in the above post. :P
-
what's the difference between bitrate and sample rate?
-
what's the difference between bitrate and sample rate?
bitrate-16 bit, 24 bit
sample rate- 44.1 KHz, 48 KHz, etc.
-
right on... so word length=bit rate?
+T for covering my brain fart
-
what's the difference between bitrate and sample rate?
bitrate-16 bit, 24 bit
sample rate- 44.1 KHz, 48 KHz, etc.
I don't think this is quite right.
Bit depth = word length. Bit rate is...I forget. Someone posted this before when I was confused about it, lemme see if I can find it...
-
what's the difference between bitrate and sample rate?
bitrate-16 bit, 24 bit
sample rate- 44.1 KHz, 48 KHz, etc.
I don't think this is quite right.
Bit depth = word length. Bit rate is...I forget. Someone posted this before when I was confused about it, lemme see if I can find it...
used when speaking of video or audio quality -- defines how much physical space one second of audio or video takes in bits (note: not in bytes). For example: 3 minutes of MP3 audio in 128kbit/sec CBR bitrate takes 2.81 megabytes of physical space (1,024 x 128 / 1,024 / 1,024 x 180 / 8). <<< smiley should be divided by eight
-
- todd, i've got the feature figured on the jb3, always wave.
- brian, it must be an anomoly within notmad(i'm going to write red chair). went back in through motmad and looked at the files. when checking properties, it's back to normal:
audio sample rate: 44
audio sample size: 16 bit
bitrate: 1411kbps
audio format: PCM (?)
now, new head scratching. is PCM windows media player's version of wav?
getting closer...
jr
-
what's the difference between bitrate and sample rate?
bitrate-16 bit, 24 bit
sample rate- 44.1 KHz, 48 KHz, etc.
Yeah ummm, I dunno what I was thinking. Bit depth-16 bit, 24 bit. Bitrate is, of course, how much space a file takes up per unit of time.
-
now, new head scratching. is PCM windows media player's version of wav?
Possible I'm wrong here... hopefully someone will back me up.
PCM is a standard. I can't think of an analogy (too late for me). Wav is the file format native to windows. Other OS's (notably Mac using aiff) use a different file type for PCM audio.
-
On the subject of JB3 and bitrate... is the max for the JB3 16/48? I heard somewhere it could be tricked into doing 24/88.1 (or whatever the sample rate is) with an incorrect header and could be later corrected. Any truth to this ???
-
some people are recording @ 48 and changing the header in post. i haven't heard of anyone taking it any higher, although i just did post the question to njb3tapers.
jr
-
some people are recording @ 48 and changing the header in post. i haven't heard of anyone taking it any higher, although i just did post the question to njb3tapers.
jr
Cool thanks 8)
-
yep, now if the jb3 could handle 24/48, id upgrade to the 40GB in a heartbeat ;), thatd be one hell of an easy setup 480>v3>odl-312>jb3
now if only grace could/would do the optical mods :P
-
now if only grace could/would do the optical mods :P
you're not on the list?
-
On the subject of JB3 and bitrate... is the max for the JB3 16/48? I heard somewhere it could be tricked into doing 24/88.1 (or whatever the sample rate is) with an incorrect header and could be later corrected. Any truth to this ???
To clarify previous posts, the JB3 *only* records in 16-bit. However, some people have succeeded in recording ag higher sample rates than 48kHz. The way to do this is to send it a sample rate higher than 48kHz, say...96kHz. The JB3 will record the file with a 48kHz header but not resample to 48kHz. After transferring the file back to PC, it's possible to change the file header to 96kHz.
-
On the subject of JB3 and bitrate... is the max for the JB3 16/48? I heard somewhere it could be tricked into doing 24/88.1 (or whatever the sample rate is) with an incorrect header and could be later corrected. Any truth to this ???
To clarify previous posts, the JB3 *only* records in 16-bit. However, some people have succeeded in recording ag higher sample rates than 48kHz. The way to do this is to send it a sample rate higher than 48kHz, say...96kHz. The JB3 will record the file with a 48kHz header but not resample to 48kHz. After transferring the file back to PC, it's possible to change the file header to 96kHz.
im trying this right now since i have the day off ;)
ill let ya'll know my findings w/ the newest firmware
-
im at 96k and recording so far so good, the header on the jb3 says 44.1k, and the seconds are MOVIN fast
-
the jb3 at 16/96 doesnt work, it records, but when you playback, it soundz like a message from hell, the header shows 44.1k too
im trying at 88.2 now, ill get back asap
-
HOLY SHIT, IT DOES 16/96!!!!!!!!!!
heres how, on my v3, i made the samp freq 96 and of course 16 bit, ANSR on, now heres the deal, you have to encode it back to 96 k, cause its header says 44.1, so played back normal under the 44.1k file, it soundz slow and whatnot, but in wavelab, open the normal file from the jb3, go to edit, then audio properties, and once its set to 96k, save the file, then BAM, when its saved reopen it, wala, it plays fine, however i have no clue if its a true 96k file, brian??? how would i tell???
-
bean, can you listen to it directly through your headphone jack?
go to the file in windows>properties>summary. that will show you the sample freq. that got written to your drive.
jr
-
bean, can you listen to it directly through your headphone jack?
go to the file in windows>properties>summary. that will show you the sample freq. that got written to your drive.
jr
i already erased it off the jb3 :P
but on my comp speakers thru wavelab, once i switched the sampling frequency for the whole file, it played flawlessly, and a 23 minute file on the jb3, was only 11 minutes of real-time wav :)
-
right on... so word length=bit rate?
+T for covering my brain fart
Rightch....or better, bit-depth = "bit-rate" , because it really isn't speed.
Sample rate is speed. Plat a 44.1kHz recording at 96kHz, locked, and check it out. Alvin and the Chipmunks ride again.
<subliminal Vegas Reminder>
:fishy: :fishy: :fishy: :fishy:
</subliminal Vegas Reminder>
-
HOLY SHIT, IT DOES 16/96!!!!!!!!!!
I tested this out a whle ago - it does record at 96k and converting the header for play back is easy... but it also drops samples like crazy at that rate. So it really doens't work...
I also got excited about it the first time, but then the testing kicked in :(
-
HOLY SHIT, IT DOES 16/96!!!!!!!!!!
I tested this out a whle ago - it does record at 96k and converting the header for play back is easy... but it also drops samples like crazy at that rate. So it really doens't work...
I also got excited about it the first time, but then the testing kicked in :(
thats cool, i ahvent done any testing, and also, it EATS time up, as im sure you know, i think 10 minutes went by and the jb3 read 24 mins
-
The timing must be driven by the number of bits written - so it should probably move at double speed for a 96k recording
-
The timing must be driven by the number of bits written - so it should probably move at double speed for a 96k recording
yep, that soundz about right, for now, looks like ill stick w/ 48/44.1k ;)
-
FYI -
Sample rate (44.1/48/96/etc) is how many sample (snapshots) per second are taken of the incoming signal. 48Khz = 48,000 times per second.
Bit DEPTH is word size, or how many segments that single sample is divided into for digitizing.
Keep in mind, not only do you have to create a number for FREQUENCY, but for AMPLITUDE also.
Increasing sample rate & depth will give you more accuracy and detail -which may appear to be interchangable terms.
There used to be a really good article on Creatives website that described this - can't find the sucker anymore...
Rick
-
The timing must be driven by the number of bits written - so it should probably move at double speed for a 96k recording
yep, that soundz about right, for now, looks like ill stick w/ 48/44.1k ;)
Are there still drop-outs at 88.2? That stinks that the JB3 can't keep up with 96... maybe in the next model :hmmm:
-
It would appear that the recording ability of the JB3, is not a real priority for Creative, as all the newer models (Zen, etc.) are geared more towards smaller packages and playback only.
The JB3 is almost at the end of it's lifecycle (as far as computer products go, about 2 yrs.), and for the miniscule market segment that tapers occupy (and let's face it, we ARE but a very small market segment) I don't see them spending a whole lot of time developing a new, high quality field recorder, for the 1,000 or so units they may sell because of that capability - much less the R&D required to move it up to a higher resolution bit-rate, or make it stealthier.
Remember, the recording industry (RIAA, etc) is our ENEMY, whether the BANDS are our friends or not. To them we're BOOTLEGGERS, no better than common thieves. Any device that's going to enhance our ability to STEAL thier profits, is sure to attract negative attention from that portion of the industry. How much heat do you think Creative is going to be willing to take, for a few measly tapers.
Evidenced by the fact that they haven't done a whole lot to enhance the abilities of the current model, and with major players in pro and consumer audio appearing to be getting into the HD recording game, I don't know that we're going to see any new devices from Creative to compete in that arena.
For most people, the JB3 is just a toy. Those like US that would harness it's capabilities to make taping that much easier, should count our blessings. I'm sure the recording capabilities of the JB3 were an afterthought for Creative, and not the reason for it's design in the least.
Rick
-
The timing must be driven by the number of bits written - so it should probably move at double speed for a 96k recording
yep, that soundz about right, for now, looks like ill stick w/ 48/44.1k ;)
Are there still drop-outs at 88.2? That stinks that the JB3 can't keep up with 96... maybe in the next model :hmmm:
in all actuality, it really doesnt stink
1.it eats up WAY more disk space,
2. you have to redo the wave and encode it back to 88.2, 96k whatever
3.its not adding as much detail as say a 24 bit file
-
in all actuality, it really doesnt stink
1.it eats up WAY more disk space,
2. you have to redo the wave and encode it back to 88.2, 96k whatever
3.its not adding as much detail as say a 24 bit file
Is disc space really that much of an issue? I mean, even if it's taking up twice as much space? Have you ever gotten your jb3 half full from recording?
I do most definitely agree with the last issue. 24 bit would kick ass. Good by lappy :)
-
in all actuality, it really doesnt stink
1.it eats up WAY more disk space,
2. you have to redo the wave and encode it back to 88.2, 96k whatever
3.its not adding as much detail as say a 24 bit file
Is disc space really that much of an issue? I mean, even if it's taking up twice as much space? Have you ever gotten your jb3 half full from recording?
I do most definitely agree with the last issue. 24 bit would kick ass. Good by lappy :)
what im saying is, id rather 24 bit files take up more space rather than sampling frequency, i mean, there are dropouyts and obvious issues at doing it at 96k!!!
i got all happy when i found out it would do 96k, but in all actuallity, i was told it was dropping bits left and right if i actually checked it out, which i have no idea how to
the wav sounded perfect on playback tho, FWIW
-
I also tried recording at 16/96, and at first a 20-second clip I tried worked perfectly, which freaked me right out. Then I tried longer periods, and the drop-outs came. Same with 88.2.
And I'd much rather have 16/88.2 than 24/44.1. 24-bit is better for offering more dynamic range, but audience noise usually hovers around -45dB anyway. 88.2kHz would really offer twice the detail of 44.1kHz, and also be well-suited for downsampling to 44.1.
-
personally, id take a 24/48 file over anything, the best of both worlds
-
But look at it this way. If you were running a higher bitrate/depth, you couldn't patch anyone that wasn't capable of capturing at that rate.
That would seem like the ultimate cop-out - "ah, sorry dude, I'm running 96/24 - can you record 96/24 - no? - guess you can't patch ME then"...
Hang a sign on your stand, 96/24 ONLY
heh heh heh...
Rick
-
i saw that happen 2 weeks ago at ymsb, and from now on that will be what il have to say to patchers
i am running the mme at 24/48 because im using the coax output (soon to be aes output) because im using a vx pocket v2.
so patchers are basically SOL if they want a patch from me. i only have a headphone output on the mme and the headphone out on the vx pocket, and i dont even know if that functions during recording
-
Beggars can't be choosers.
-
i saw that happen 2 weeks ago at ymsb, and from now on that will be what il have to say to patchers
i am running the mme at 24/48 because im using the coax output (soon to be aes output) because im using a vx pocket v2.
so patchers are basically SOL if they want a patch from me. i only have a headphone output on the mme and the headphone out on the vx pocket, and i dont even know if that functions during recording
If larger storage options become possible, that new Fostex deck may capture a large portion of the market. I'd consider dumping the V3 and the D10 and leaving the JB3 on the Harley if that ever gets going.
Rick